YOU ARE HERE: Central Kentucky Home→Collections→War

Letter: Afghanistan is not Normandy

December 21, 2009

Dear Editor,

I have never made any claim that I am any sort of military strategist. Never. Simply put, I am not.

But it is abundantly clear that neither is Gil Russell. His answer to the Afghanistan problem is "turn the full force of American power loose to destroy them." Full force includes nuclear weapons.

I doubt Mr. Russell understands the implications of such a statement. But then, his hero is George W. Bush.

Mr. Russell doesn't seem to comprehend that this war is completely different than any war we have ever fought. There is no single, simple solution. Also, it is a different time in world history.

Afghanistan is not Normandy or Mount Suribachi.

In this war, the advantage is in favor of the enemy — from the local population to the terrain. The attack style of the enemy is by ambush. Our intelligence is faulty. The enemy fights with a strong ideology. I just don't believe that we or anyone else can defeat that.

As much as I detest war, in all fairness to Mr. Russell, I do agree that wars cannot be won by "surgical strikes."

And I also agree that there has been serious failure in leadership, and that failure came from George W. Bush. It was under his watch that the enemy attacked us on Sept. 11, 2001. He took this nation to war in Afghanistan, then made no effort to win it because of his twisted obsession with Iraq.

We should be a bit more concerned with the rise of home-grown terrorists right here in the United States. This is a real threat and a huge danger.

The enemy keeps us tied down in Afghanistan, allowing others to slip through the back door.

"Destroying them" over there will not and cannot solve the problem.

It is a complex and exceedingly difficult problem. It requires much more than bombs and bullets to solve. I do not have the answer. Nor does Gil Russell. Perhaps there is no answer.

Roger D. Bowman
Danville

|

|

|